Sunday, June 25, 2017

Did I speak too soon last night in saying that any worries about the SNP making the historic error of reversing their referendum policy had receded? Today's Sunday Mail splashed with an "exclusive" claiming an indyref "U-turn", and suggesting that the plans for a vote "by 2019" are about to be scrapped. The reaction of independence supporters on social media has been interesting - most take the view that the Sunday Mail are playing games by misreporting a restatement of the original policy as a U-turn, but on the other extreme Ben Wray has taken the story at face value and accused Nicola Sturgeon of giving up Scotland's only leverage over Brexit.

It goes without saying that the Record and Sunday Mail must be regarded as hostile, cynical, and utterly unscrupulous actors in all this. It's perfectly possible that they've deliberately misrepresented the information they've received in pursuit of their anti-independence agenda. Apart from more mischief-making from Alex Neil (a former fundamentalist who has now practically reinvented himself as the one-man indy-sceptic wing of the SNP), the only fresh quotes in the article are from an anonymous source using very ambiguous language, which could be seen as vaguely consistent with the Sunday Mail's claims, but could just as easily be seen as merely pointing to a modest change of detail and emphasis as the existing referendum policy is essentially upheld.

If it's the latter, there's no problem. No-one is going to die in a ditch to keep open the theoretical possibility of a referendum in autumn 2018, as long as a date not too long after that remains firmly on the cards. By the same token, no-one is going to object if Nicola Sturgeon points out that the loss of the Tory majority has changed the dynamic on Brexit, and that we won't be 100% sure that a referendum is actually necessary until the possibility of maintaining membership of the single market is definitively excluded from the negotiations. (Incidentally, that change in circumstances would be an indisputable fact regardless of whether the SNP had won zero seats, fifty-nine, or absolutely any number in between.)

But if there is the slightest truth in the notion that Nicola Sturgeon will announce that a referendum has been 'called off for the time being' as a consequence of the general election result in Scotland, that would be a catastrophic error of judgement and an abandonment of the most basic democratic principles. It would mean repudiating a decision taken not by the SNP, but by the democratically-elected Scottish Parliament only a matter of weeks ago. It would not be done because the SNP had lost a subsequent election, but because their victory in that election had not been by a margin deemed acceptable by the unionist commentariat. Because Conservative votes in a minority of constituencies apparently carry more weight than SNP votes in the majority of constituencies. Capitulating to that grotesque logic would be a betrayal of the hundreds of thousands of people who helped the SNP win the election, and who did so in good faith on the basis that a majority of seats would complete a 'triple-lock' mandate for an independence referendum.

Here's what I don't understand : even looking at it from a hard-headed pragmatic point of view, what would be the point of waving the white flag now? If you think Indyref 2 cost the SNP votes in Aberdeenshire, that's all very well and good, but where's the time machine that's going to change what happened? The election is over, the hit has already been taken, and it probably isn't about to be undone. It's perfectly conceivable there won't be another election of any type until the Holyrood contest in May 2021 - very nearly four years away. Why wouldn't you get on with celebrating and defending the mandate you've just won in very difficult circumstances, rather than voluntarily surrendering that mandate as part of some 'grand bargain' with voters in the hope of winning a phantom election by an even bigger margin than you've just won the real election? I do fear that the hysteria of the last couple of weeks has led to a few people in the SNP losing their compass.

Peter A Bell said today that he would support any decision that Nicola Sturgeon takes, because it would be bound to be taken in the best interests of Scotland. I must say I take a somewhat different view - if I think a terrible mistake has been made, I'll say so. However, I await the actual announcement with interest, and I remain hopeful that the Sunday Mail are just spinning us a line, and that there will be no "U-turn" or "cancelling" of the referendum.

25 comments:

"But if there is the slightest truth in the notion that Nicola Sturgeon will announce that a referendum has been 'called off for the time being' as a consequence of the general election result in Scotland, that would be a catastrophic error of judgement and an abandonment of the most basic democratic principles. It would mean repudiating a decision taken not by the SNP, but by the democratically-elected Scottish Parliament only a matter of weeks ago. It would not be done because the SNP had lost a subsequent election, but because their victory in that election had not been by a margin deemed acceptable by the unionist commentariat. Because Conservative votes in a minority of constituencies apparently carry more weight than SNP votes in the majority of constituencies. Capitulating to that grotesque logic would be a betrayal of the hundreds of thousands of people who helped the SNP win the election, and who did so in good faith on the basis that a majority of seats would complete a 'triple-lock' mandate for an independence referendum."

Which is why it won't happen.

I don't know the mind of Nicola Sturgeon any more than the papers or commentariat. But I do know this: many in the SNP are absolutely devastated by the election result. Not because we lost - we clearly didn't - but because it that victory had a great cost. Our former First Minister and party leader; our former Depute Leader & Westminster Leader; our Chief Whip; the MP who delivered the first ever SNP-led bill into statute; and so many more powerful voices, replaced by people who didn't even deign to live in the constituency. The thousands of activists who fought to return their MPs across 21 constituencies were crushed. And here's bloody Ruth Davidson proudly announcing that "indyref2 is dead," David Mundell proclaiming "indyref2 no more," Lab and Lib Dem alike cheering 13 constituencies going Tory - because at least they beat the hated SNP, right?

This is what the Unionists want, after all: they want the SNP, and the independence movement in general, to sit down and shut up. You lost. Forever. Get over it. All that remains is for it to become official, by Nicola Sturgeon formally dropping indyref2. The tens of thousands who flocked to the SNP after 2014 would cut up their membership cards; all the non-members who voted for & supported the SNP would depart, not voting for anyone; even the SNP faithful would be shaken to their core. We may even say SNP MPs, MSPs, and councillors resigning the party - remember the NATO vote? - and the end of the SNP would begin.

OR...

Nicola Sturgeon would see a despondent, dispirited Scotland. Where England & Wales experienced massive engagement, Scottish voters just didn't turn up. They felt their vote didn't matter, or that there was no point in voting. And now, as they see the reality of 13 Tories (& 11 Lab/Lib) replacing some of the finest politicians in Scotland, they feel an intense sense of futility - after all, the BBC are saying the Tories won, so they must have, right? The SNP members & activists are spent from near back-to-back campaigning: independence is the only thing keeping them going. The Unionists think "finally, we can get back to normal." But we cannot - because there is no normal.

I may be making myself a slave to fortune here, but I cannot believe that Nicola Sturgeon, who has proven herself one of the most intelligent, insightful politicians in Scotland, would make such a self-evidently catastrophic mistake. The Labour exodus post-indyref would be as nothing compared to an SNP which chooses to abandon its ultimate, defining goal.

There's two issues here now. First the human side, it's easy to sit on the outside and say "oh well, let's just keep going" but the psychological effect of losing beloved colleagues will be extremely a painful pyrrhic victory for the party and its activists. All the most so when they are "big hitters."

Second is UK politics. It remains completely unpredictable. I think we shouldn't underestimate how dire the political situation is in the UK right now. There is an extremely high probability that May will be gone in the next few months. Any new leader will suffer the same problem as May -- that "their vision of Brexit" will not be sanctioned by the electorate. The Government remains hostage to a bitterly divided Tory party. There is a Remain and Leave faction who - at the slightest transgression - will oppose the Government and could bring it down. It seems completely obvious to me that this Parliament will not last till 2022. Another General election early next year is extremely unlikely to return a Tory majority. We will look at another hung parliament with either Tories or Labour ahead. This leads us back to where we are now.

To be honest - I think it's 50/50 whether Brexit will happen at all. If it does it's either going to be the softest of soft Brexits, or a complete and utter omnishambles followed by crashing out of all the treaties, leaving gaping holes in the law and the UK outside even the WTO.

In all of those Brexit outcomes, the Scottish electorate **may** not plum for Independence. If it's Brexit-lite nothing really changes and "it doesn't seem so bad". If it's a crashing-out Brexit then the Scottish electorate may become hostile to any more political upheaval.

"it's easy to sit on the outside and say "oh well, let's just keep going" but the psychological effect of losing beloved colleagues will be extremely a painful pyrrhic victory for the party and its activists"

Is the alternative not to keep going? The Conservatives lost 40 seats in 1992, including big names like Chris Patten, but that wasn't a pyrrhic victory either. A majority is a majority, and the SNP won a pretty handsome majority. There is the undoubted shock of losing three seats that have been held since 1987, but if any of us had been told only a few years ago that the SNP were going to win six out of seven Glasgow seats in the 2017 general election (or three out of five Edinburgh seats for that matter), we'd have thought we were in dreamland. There are very much two sides to this coin.

"It seems completely obvious to me that this Parliament will not last till 2022."

It's a brave person who rules out any date for the next election, including May 2022. In October 1974, few people thought the next election could be delayed much beyond 1976, but an unpopular government that knows it's likely to lose a quick election can sometimes cling on for grim death if it really has a mind to. That parliament lasted almost the full five-year term, in spite of a string of government defeats in by-elections.

I'd have thought as long as it was immediately before the UK's absolute capitulation to the EU. So, yes. Immediately before the final withdrawal, if that's what you meant.As long as we have a window of opportunity to stay within the EU or go. Might be a tad tight on the timing.

I think the Sunday Mail are at it here. The General Election caught us off guard. I must admit I was lazy during the election . I just went through the motions I was convinced we would sqooosh it and return 45 Mps at a minimum. I am in a Glasgow constituency , we have a solid core vote . Our vote in the poorer parts of the city is not sophisticated it does not bother about the ins and outs of Brexit cares nothing about currencies and does not give too hoots about budget defecits. The core vote just wants Indy.I am loathe to criticise the leadership and I know the long term aim is to sway those middle income earners round to Yes.In last months election however we ran a lacklustre campaign. I think the party was trying to be too clever. We should have ran a defensive campaign forgot about trying to convince the swing voters and just banged the Indy drum big time and gone for the core vote . We have 2 or 3 years before Indyref2 at least and 4 years to the next Scottish Parliament plenty of time to convince the doubters . We could have trumped the Corbyn bounce , yes we would have lost the hard left but the cause of Indy is far more potent than the cause of UK Labour . Corbyn nice guy as he is , is still a Unionist . We should have hammered him on his Unionism Colonel Davidson motivated the hard unionists we should have fought fire with fire . Got the kid gloves off and got tore into her

Kenny Macaskill and Alex Neil are being worked from the back by the puppet master . The puppet master has held a grudge for years and he see the departure of Alex as his opportunity to settle old scores . Now is not the time for infighting or naval gazing in my opinion.

In regard to Nicola I just dont see her changing tact. The Unionists are trying to make a mountain out a mole hill. Nicola said away back that the dates for Indyref2 are negotiable the Yoons are going to home in on this and try to make mischief.

Nicola is just being cautious its just her way she is just thinking things over. Nicola is as hard as nails she is no quiter .Defeats in Govan in 97 99 and 2003 were hard to take but she turned down "safe seats"(ironic now) stayed and fought for Govan until she eventually won it. That should give an insight in to her character

I can remember the times when we had one council seat in Glasgow now we have 35 mps so yes the election was disappointing but lets put it in perspective. Nicola will come bouncing back big time of that I am 100% certain .Anyone one in the opposition who thinks Nicola is finished forget it .Peak Nat ha ha . How often have they written off the SNP . We are supposed to be stone dead a long time ago I still believe that the Brits will bounce out of Europe with No deal and that will cause panic in the Scottish business community. Things will then swing our way.Nicola unlike Colonel Davidson or Kezia Dugdale has not flipped or flopped on Europe . The only party leader who will have stayed consistent and not been blown off course by events or the mood music at the time is Nicola.I know everyone is a wee bit down at the moment but the election is just a wee bump in the road and should be taken as a warning shot not to be too complacent. The Unionist are going to put up a fight and we just got to dust ourselves down and work harder than ever before . We are so close to achieving our aim as James keeps stating support for Indy is a solid 45% . So its onwards and upwards to Indy

The only promise I recall having been made by the SG was that a referendum on independence might be called after the outcome of Brexit negotiations were known,should they negatively impact on Scotland.Nothing has changed,except the London based politicians and press pack demanding that it be taken off the table no matter how much damage is done to Scotland by Brexit.They are making clear that they have no interest in protecting Scotland's interests and it appears that quite a number of Scots agree with them.Fool me once,shame on you........

I believe that a "hard" Brexit is inevitable which will definitely impact badly on Scotland.The "soft" Brexit the Tories seek,at least the "moderate" ones is basically what Cameron did prior to announcing the EU referendum.A super opt out of freedom of movement of labour plus May's added bells and whistles demand,removing the Tories from accountability to European courts.The EU will not agree to that so it will be the full English Brexit,ignoring Scotland's interests completely.We either roll over and accept that or decide to do something completely different.

There is 'strategy' and there are 'tactics'. Both are connected and, it is to be hoped that the latter are consistent with the former, since they are included within it. In a very fluid situation such as exists at present, then 'tactics' tend to dominate. 'Strategies' are not unchangeable and have to adapt, too, but they have a greater 'inertia' than tactics which often have to be 'light on their feet' and be pragmatic.Behind all of these is the key value - an independent Scotland. Remember Martin Luther King's 'I have a Dream' speech at the Lincoln Memorial.

This might be a bit off-topic but does anyone know what the UK's bargaining chips actually are? I'm trying to think of stuff the UK has that the rest of Europe might want-but-doesn't-have-enough-of and I can only really think of fishing, scotch, and (big maybe) oil. Europe is self sufficient in labour, energy, tech, automotive, jam-and-other-foodstuffs, hats, porn, manufacturing, and they also have most of the cheese.

I'm scratching my head trying to think of how David Davis is gonna play this one. Going by his last visit to the EU, even if he manages a rock solid poker face it'll be undone by the smell of shat pants.

The problém is that they assumed they could bully the smaller countries and count on the traditional france- german divide to keep the financial services.instead, the mainland has caught on to this goldmine and are pursuing it.ironically, i think the whole " we'll pull the bank s from scotland if they leave" tactic tipped them off to this .

Even I'm surprised at how united the members are though. But then I suppose that's the whole point of being a member in the first place - the strength of nations standing together. I can't help thinking that the smaller ones smell blood and rich pickings though, and I bet that a few of them will be more than happy for the EU to land a kick to the plums on their behalf while we're on the way down. In fact I bet they all are.

This might be a bit off-topic but does anyone know what the UK's bargaining chips actually are?

Despite the damage of Brexit, we're still the 6th largest economy in the world, and due to a combination of language and culture and legacy we're a gateway to and from the U.S. and the Commonwealth for trade in services.In fact before Brexit screwed everything up we were on track to be the biggest economy in Europe within the next 10 years.

We're too small to ever again be a major player in the manufacturing or commodities markets though. But we're still a desirable import destination, after all there's 65m of us and we have a pretty strong consumer base (by world standards).

Obviously most of this counts multiple times in reverse, but that's why voting leave was a stupid bloody idea in the first place. Economically everybody loses, and the only political winners are people who hate foreigners, or want the votes of those who do.

It's a shame that the world doesn't have a cupboard, is what I'm thinking. Scared nations could go and hide themselves in it when the world become too frightening to them. They could hold up a yellow flag or something so that the other nations know, "Uh oh, the Brits are having another meltdown, you get the door, I'll move the Dyson." And then the UK can go stand in the cupboard for an hour or so while it gets its shit together, and in the meantime the other nations can get on with life during the respite period, and then the UK can come out after they've pulled themselves together, and the other nations can roll their eyes and pat it on the back like a triggered mate, and the world keeps on turning. Yeah, a cupboard, that's all it would take. God has let humanity down badly through His oversight, me'thinks. A space under the stairs would also work. Or standing behind some thick curtains. There are lots of options when you think about it. A shed, even.

The troll "GWC2" calls scottish people "jocks", made death threats on this blog while posing as a Yes supporter, advocates arming Leave campaigners, arbitrary deportations and public mutilations, claimed Jo Cox's husband was a fascist, uses racial, homophobic and ethnic slurs, pretends to be Labour (badly) while espousing far-right racist hate-speech, praises Theresa May and the tories and displays a perverted poisonous obsession with Scotland's First Minister.

I no longer get a Sunday newspaper,various reason,but all crap is the politest I can say what I think of them.As for the Sunday Mail worst of them all,perhaps it was done to see the reactions on social media by SNP supporters,and hope for mass resignations,nae chance ya chancers,if the top end of the SNP ever did give up on independence then we at the base would just have to take back our party and re-instate our independence aims,aims might be a Freudian slip ? not sure though.I'll leave the SNP when I'm deid and I hope to live long enough to see independence,as I'm only 65 I'm still sure I'll be at the independence party.I've always voted SNP since I was able to vote in the 1970,s at some point.

I think it was Bill Whiteford on Radio Scotland that noted that Indyref2 may be parked, but the SNP have left the motor running.

I don't think parked is a big deal. You park your vehicle somewhere safe with the intent of resuming your journey. In the meantime there is work to be done preparing for that journey and also ensuring Holyrood functions to its best ability.

In the weeks to come it will be the day job of the Tories under the spotlight and it will be the Tories that will be trying to justify their decisions and actions. We have time to make this good.